§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Respondent,v.Lawrence Blankymsee, Appellant.

Brief

7 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Lingle

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 3308 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 480 times
    Holding that a defendant's right to appeal after a resentencing is "limited to the correction of errors or the abuse of discretion at the resentencing proceeding"

  2. People v. Sparber

    2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 3946 (N.Y. 2008)   Cited 355 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, by imposing PRS terms, DOCS usurped the judicial function as defined by New York law; only the sentencing court has the authority to impose the PRS component of the sentence and must do so at the time of sentencing

  3. People v. Williams

    14 N.Y.3d 198 (N.Y. 2010)   Cited 257 times
    Holding that “after release from prison, a legitimate expectation in the finality of a sentence arises and the Double Jeopardy Clause prevents reformation to attach a PRS component to the original completed sentence”

  4. People v. Velez

    2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 5198 (N.Y. 2012)   Cited 26 times
    In Velez, we addressed whether a defendant acquired a legitimate expectation of finality in an illegal sentence where a resentencing proceeding had been instituted but the term of PRS had not yet been imposed prior to the expiration of the sentence.

  5. In Matter of New York v. Rashid

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 1316 (N.Y. 2010)   Cited 24 times

    No. 205. Argued October 19, 2010. Decided November 23, 2010. APPEAL, by permission of the Court of Appeals, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, entered December 22, 2009. The Appellate Division affirmed an order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Daniel P. Conviser, J.; op 25 Misc 3d 318), which had (1) granted respondent's motion to dismiss a petition seeking sex offender civil management of respondent pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law

  6. People v. Velez

    79 A.D.3d 542 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)   Cited 6 times

    No. 3892. December 14, 2010. Judgment of resentence, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Efrain L. Alvarado, J)., rendered June 18, 2009, resentencing defendant to a term of nine years, with five years' postrelease supervision, unanimously reversed, on the law, the resentence vacated, and the original sentence without postrelease supervision reinstated. Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Mark W. Zeno of counsel), for appellant. Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Bari L

  7. People v. Kevin Wells

    28 Misc. 3d 628 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2010)   Cited 1 times

    No. 7678846K. May 26, 2010. Appellate Advocates, New York City ( Lynn W.L. Fahey and Sonia Mikolic-Torreira of counsel), for defendant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, for plaintiff. OPINION OF THE COURT ROBERT CHARLES KOHM, J. Pursuant to CPL 440.20, the defendant has moved for an order vacating that portion of his resentencing by this court which, on December 14, 2009, imposed a five-year period of postrelease supervision (PRS) to his original sentence. The defendant's application